From the Editor: Dr. Matt
Maurer is the brother of NFB President Marc Maurer. He is on sabbatical from
his teaching job at Butler University in Indiana. Here is his report on the
Rocket On! Science Academy camp last summer:

Heather
Hammond and Kyle Conley pose with the tail section of the rocket in the
foreground.

In July I was privileged to be part
of the facilitation team for the Rocket On! Session of the 2005 Science Academy,
which was conducted by the NFB in partnership with NASA. The Academy was open
to blind high school students from around the country who have an interest in
science. It was the second year for this project, which coupled instruction
from NASA scientists with facilitation and mentoring from NFB members. Additional
instruction was delivered by other selected presenters.

The eleven students assembled in 2005 comprised an exceptionally
talented group from around the country. In my work as a professor of education,
I have had the opportunity to work with many varied groups of students. This
group was as talented as any I have met. Yet each member of the group came with
his or her individual challenges.

By the end of the program it was clear that the Academy had
been wildly successful, not because the launch was successful, but because a
tremendous amount of learning and growth had occurred. That growth was not simply
about science; it included personal growth on the part of each individual student--growth
in self-confidence, self-awareness, travel skills, attitude about blindness,
teamwork, and myriad other areas.

In science they learned about electrical circuits, rocket motors,
parachutes, stars, and materials science, to name a few of the topics they studied.
Given that blind learners often have a relatively weak experience in science,
that learning was important. That importance notwithstanding, the personal growth
was even more important, because the odds are that few of these students will
choose to become rocket scientists. For those who do not, the science learning
that occurred becomes interesting and broadly useful background knowledge. I
trust that each of these students will go on to do something important in the
world, and their personal growth will serve all of the students intimately and
powerfully.

Yet another area of growth was the development of their philosophy
of blindness. These students each came from different circumstances, they had
amassed vastly different experience sets, and they have had different kinds
of mentoring in their lives. Only a few of the students had already had much
in the way of blind role models. Some students had done little thinking about
blindness, while others had done more but without much expert guidance. Some
students had even developed significant misconceptions about the general capabilities
of blind people. The thinking they did during the Academy coupled with the guidance
they received while doing that thinking produced some noticeable results. I
could see a cohesive, positive philosophy developing in most of the students,
and in a few I could see an existing philosophy being reinforced or sometimes
challenged.

Nijat Worley works on the rocket's electronics with NASA electrical technician Jim LaGarde observing his work.

In addition to the learning and personal growth, another important
outcome was the development of personal relationships. Many connections were
formed among the students, the facilitators, the presenters, and the NASA staff,
some of which will last. In addition, the relationships that were formed could
potentially become an entree for the students into an important community. The
Academy certainly introduced the students to the NFB, and it gave each student
several people as primary contacts within the NFB. It also gave the students
a few NASA contacts that could allow access to that scientific community. In
addition, the NFB established an email list for this year’s and last year’s
students. The participants themselves are and could continue to be the core
of an interesting and potentially useful community.

With all the emphasis I place on the personal development that
occurred, one might wonder if the science element of the Academy was all that
important. It was tremendously important because every student left the Academy
with the idea that, “If I wish, I can become a scientist.” That idea alone is
worthy of all the time, effort, and expense invested in this project.

Given the great success of this Academy, one might ask what
made it so successful? The key elements of its success include:

· The small number of students
· The number of blind people involved
· The high credibility of instructors and presenters
· The close contact with NASA scientists
· The instructional design
· The personalities of instructors and facilitators
· The high expectations for the learners
· The student mentors
· The students

One of the most important choices in the design of the Academy
was to keep it small. It was designed for about twelve students, and this year
eleven attended. That small number allowed the facilitators and presenters to
make intimate connections with each student. No student could hide, and no one
got lost in the shuffle.

Another important issue was the high number of blind people
involved in the project. All but one of the facilitators was blind (which meant
I was a minority of one on the team). Some of the presenters were blind, and
the students had an opportunity to meet with a group of blind NASA employees.
The high ratio of blind to sighted adult participants coupled with the relatively
small student group gave the students ample opportunity to connect intimately
with a blind person and receive a wide range of modeling and mentoring. Many
of the students had previously had little or no opportunity to have that sort
of relationship with a blind adult. So many blind individuals were involved
that several times the visual acuity of the adults was not explicitly defined,
and the students sometimes got it wrong. That was gratifying because it illustrated
to them that being blind versus being sighted is not the great distinction that
is often assumed.

The fact that the presenters all had very high qualifications
to teach their subjects helped with the student engagement at the time of instruction,
and it helped add enthusiasm for the entire project. Working with a university
physicist, for example, got the students’ attention, and it made them more excited
about the entire program. Working with the NASA scientists was particularly
powerful in this regard. When each student was partnered with a NASA scientist
for the launch, not a sleepyhead appeared in the room, even though the students
were in fact operating on very little sleep due to the 3:00 a.m. wake-up call.

The design of the instruction was an important element of the
success of Rocket On! The goal of launching a rocket was probably the single
most important element of the design, which kept the students focused individually
and helped them pull together as a group. The flow of the instruction from morning
until night and from day to day also contributed. The days were very intense,
filled with a wide range of activities. This maintained the students’ attention.
There was little time for minds to wander; and, although there were a few nodding
heads from time to time, that problem was minimal. Even though the time we spent
together was packed with activity, the facilitators took time for issues as
they arose in the group. For example, more than once issues related to blindness
arose. We made time in the schedule to discuss these issues and to come to some
resolution.

The choice of instructors and facilitators was also important.
The group of adults who worked with these students was uncommonly flexible.
Changes were made on the fly, people jumped in when needed, and above all the
adults were all sincerely interested in working with the students, talking with
them, explaining, and clarifying. If a gap developed, somebody figured out a
way to fill it. In addition, very little in the way of overblown egos surfaced
among the adults. They were all highly credentialed, and in a group like this
egos are often a problem. Each adult involved seemed truly committed to the
growth of the students. Many intimate connections were made between students
and adults. Along with the learning a lot of banter, teasing, and jibing permeated
the session. This set a tone that was at the same time serious and playful.
That combination is powerful for learning--too playful and little gets accomplished,
too serious and students disengage from the learning. The personalities of the
adults made the tone and flow of the Academy particularly effective for student
learning.

All of the adults clearly had high expectations for the students.
In many programs the words “high expectations” are prominent, yet during this
Academy little was said on the subject. Instead we all lived those expectations.
They were implicit in the way the Academy was structured, they were implicit
in the way adults interacted with students, and they were implicit in the requirements
of student behavior and performance. As is so often the case, the students rose
to the expectations of the facilitators and instructors, and in some cases they
exceeded those expectations.

Two students from the previous year were selected to act as
student mentors. This was helpful in creating an ongoing culture of this Academy.
Even though some of the activities were refined from last year, it was important
to establish a mode of operation for the Academy. The students from 2004 helped
create that thread of continuity. They also provided some important maturity
and peer mentoring for the 2005 group. The student mentors were living examples
of what is expected of a Rocket On! participant.

The most important element making this Academy successful was
the students themselves. Each time I enter into a learning situation like this
I am reminded of the old saw--“you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t
make it drink.” All we could do was to provide the learning opportunities; the
students had to choose to participate. These students drank--they drank deeply.

I would be remiss if I closed without some mention of the feelings
that were created by this experience. The students were challenged, and not
just academically, but also personally. These challenges produced a significant
level of stress on many of the students. Yet within this challenging environment
substantial joy was generated. I experienced a tremendous level of joy while
working with these students, and I believe most of them felt the same. We worked
hard, but while we were at it, we enjoyed each other’s company. As I remember
these intense few days, I can’t help smiling. This was a bright, powerful, and
fun group of young men and women, and we can look forward to hearing more from
them as they mature.